So if Adobe really does start to come around and consider the fact that this ''Jiveware'' is not working out to everyone's satisfaction, has anyone discussed or researched the alternatives yet?
Obviously they have had their own internal research but it doesn't mean we can't help and make suggestions based on well functioning examples of high traffic forums that we may have seen on other sites.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Internet_forum_software
Wiki has a section here (if the link works) with ''subarticles'' that contains ASP, PHP, and ''Other'' forum software comparisons.
It's not like Adobe is the only company that has a long list of high volume forums out there--what do others use??I'm sure it's not Jiveware.
What are the ''forum alternatives''?Asking question now: PHPbb?
What are the ''forum alternatives''?They need to forget about pandering to youtube-facebook-twitter-games-playing youngsters with short attention spans. They need to consider what the most valuable members of the forums want and need - those people are the ones to nurture, not the ones who arrive in a panic and don't much care what the place looks like as long as they can get rapid, authoritative help.
The people to consult should be easy to identify, and they are by no means all 'Community Experts'. Whoever makes these decisions should eat humble pie and find out what it would take to get back the real experts who have left. If that has to be NNTP, so be it. If it means speed, reliability, permanent log-ins, stripped-down-efficient-speedy-interface, go back to where you left off - concentrate on that.
I'm not saying that those who mainly ask are not important, of course they are - they are customers and it's important to attract/retain them.
But unless the unpaid 'staff' are in place, ready and willing to answer a lot of questions as patiently and accurately as they always have, the place will just fall apart. It will become a place where link-harvesters and drive-by posters play around, giving each other half-arsed answers and squabbling over points.
I'm definitely not one of the 'elite' of course - so my only real suggestion is to ask the people who matter most, and DO WHAT THEY SAY.
This is what the PHPbb for an association I belong to looks like. I believe in some versions you choice of color scheme. In this particular version several version were shown to membership and this is what was chosen
Kath-H wrote:
If that has to be NNTP, so be it. If it means speed, reliability, permanent log-ins, stripped-down-efficient-speedy-interface,
FWIW, I really liked the clean style of the WebX forum.?It wasn't bloated with the cute little icons, avatars, tabled views of topics etc.?It was a nice, clean list of topics, you could scan a bunch of previous posts and quote easily from them, it remembed where you left off, so no search to see what really was the last post you read.?Most of the ''new'' boards out there are full of the bloated icons.?It probably works well for them, as they don't have the traffic of this board, but for here, the clean and fast is the, FMV, the best way to go.
hopper
The only thing that has not changed, like we were told was in the works, is the Terms of Service. But that was a whole different thread so long ago.
I find it faster to do a google search to find something in the forums or information that I need.
Philip, PHPBB is riddled with exploitable ''issues'' and no sane developer
would ever use it in a commercial situation. When one is RFQ for such
software for a large company as Adobe, security and scaleability are two
important factors to be considered, before liking any ''skin''.
--
Best Regards,
Steve
Heh. Sounds like you're saying open source isn't going to work out.
For all we know, Jive could have just as many security issues--it's not like it's used all over the Internet or anything, like these php/asp forums are.
But like I said before, there has to be good alternatives out there in use by major players that will fit Adobe's requirements.?Adobe isn't doing anything special here, it's just a technical support forum, been done a million times already.
it's a miserable way of life and it's basically an old, defeated technology on it's way to the IT history books. security and scaleability are two important factors to be considered, before liking any ''skin''.WebCrossing Community:
http://webcrossing.com/Home/webcrossing_community.htm
For heavy load requirements, WebCrossing Community's sophisticated clustering protocol makes it simple to group redundant servers for a highly scaleable and robust environment. Scalability features include distributed and mirrored server features. Unlike some mirrored systems, which may require several minutes to distribute new postings throughout the entire mirrored network, a WebCrossing Community cluster achieves complete network distribution in milliseconds.
Scaling: Mirrored %26amp; Distributed Servers:
http://webcrossing.com/Home/scaling.htm
But it is reassuring to know that as your site grows in size, WebCrossing Core grows with you to support even millions of members without speed or service degradation. That is why WebCrossing servers have always been the choice of large companies, universities and organizations with large membership and extraordinary server load requirements.
dave milbut wrote:
it's a miserable way of life and it's basically an old, defeated technology on it's way to the IT history books.dave milbut wrote:
But it is reassuring to know that as your site grows in size, WebCrossing Core grows with you to support even millions of members without speed or service degradation. That is why WebCrossing servers have always been the choice of large companies, universities and organizations with large membership and extraordinary server load requirements.
Couldn't handle the load of both sets of forums, that's what we were told.
Ansury wrote:
dave milbut wrote:
it's a miserable way of life and it's basically an old, defeated technology on it's way to the IT history books.conditions demand it
I'm not saying they should lower prices for any single customer, I'm saying that if their prices really are set to high, they will have no choice (unless they forgo profit which is not in their best interests) but to lower those prices so that the overall market is willing to purchase. It's just basic economics.
Only the market can set a ''realistic and fair price'', it's not up to just Adobe alone.?''Corporate greed'' and profit is no different from a consumer's personal greed (to find the best deal), and there's nothing wrong with maximizing it, but that's more complex economics and is too off topic to discuss here.
So if they've made a business decision, we aren't really qualified to question that (unless you have some inside financial information that I don't, perhaps).?
What we can question is their choice of replacement software.?But so far the alternative suggestions have been a little lacking from what I've seen.
Is it the PHP or BB (bulitenboard) part.?
I know we had this BuletinBoard, prior to my stopping participation in my Association website. And the had several security upgrades to the PHP system, while I worked with website.?I just threw it out as a possibility, as Its fast. Prior to moving from LunarPages our Domain Provider at the time and switch to new, they went through several upgrades. Some security related other performance related.
Kath-H wrote:
Couldn't handle the load of both sets of forums, that's what we were told.
You supposed Money had a role in the choice.
We know, but putting the pieces together based on the information Dave posted, assuming it's correct (that the vendor's claim is accurate, which I'm not 100% convinced of honestly--''millions of members?'')... it does seem to come down to money.?He's saying that the performance allegedly can be scaled, if you're willing to pay enough.
But it is reassuring to know that as your site grows in size, WebCrossing Core grows with you to support even millions of members without speed or service degradation. Only the market can set a ''realistic and fair price'', it's not up to just Adobe alone.?PjonesCET wrote:
Is it the PHP or BB (bulitenboard) part.?
wasn't webcrossing%26gt;? someone just said it th most popular forum for Fortune 500 Companies.
And wouldn't the same hold true for the Jive Talk'' we are now on?
I know Ann, I agree with you about the forum quality.?I don't know how many customers WebX loses from their pricing plan (even they don't, honestly), but if it's too high and they're a well run business, the price will come down eventually.
I don't know for sure if Jive is all that popular (I'd guess it's not popular at all), but ''security through obscurity'' is not good security.?So if Jive really is more secure than an open source alternative or even a popular low cost alternative.... well... do we know that for sure?
It doesn't even work properly and we're talking about whether it's secure, heh, highly doubtful.
well, i dunno about whether they're priced right for their market, but they have some pretty big customers:
http://www.webcrossing.com/Home/customers.htm
Jive lays claim to some big customers too - and some of them even use it for public forums. But neither is as popular as phpBB, if popular is defined as number of public sites using the software[1].
Agreed, security by obscurity (or even by proprietary) is not security at all. The unscrupulous do tend to go for the easier targets, though.
[1] I am only guessing here - no stats to back up this claim or even a desire to look it up ;-)
Yikes! Jive does claim some big customers, and actually it's a much more impressive list. What's going on here? It's hard to believe I've never come across this rubbish before, looking at that list.
Oracle??
NASA? Are people at NASA giving each other points and marking answers ''correct''?? (Now we know why they've been having accidents..)
Then again, it is government.
This is an impressive list, you have to admit, even if you hate Jive.
http://www.jivesoftware.com/customers
What's going on here?
What's going on here?
A lot of people are jumping to ridiculous conclusions, and pointing
blame with no facts whatsoever!
Yes, there are bugs. But all the indications are they are being worked
on.
I believe that Adobe's implementation of Jive's software is not
completely standard -- which leaves room for more problems than the
usual.
We are experiencing growing pains (a lot of them), but we really
should cut these people a little bit of slack (both at Adobe and at
Jive). Give them some time to sort the (many) problems out, and then
we can see if there's what to complain about...
Sometimes I have to laugh out loud at some of the statements made in
this forum...
Harbs
Yeah, I don't know, whatever I guess.
But Jive gets no ''free pass'' until they've proven they didn't deceive and steal money from Adobe via ''creative'' marketing.
Ann Shelbourne wrote:
Adobe, as result of either excessive corporate greed or because of hidden personal agendas have failed us.
How on earth do you leap to such incredible conclusions ? I'm not referring to PHP or OSS. I'm referring to one bulletin board software application.
See BugTraq. Yes there are alternatives but without all the Criteria and the RFQ how in hell can we do the research. Obviously this isn't work you do professionally, so I'll stop here.
Philip: PHP is the scripting language. It's not the language chosen that is usually the problem, but the developers implementation of it. It was the application PHPBB, that has had some core issues. Then when one adds components (extensions) developed by different developers, one opens up a Pandora's box.
There are better implemenations of PHP bullentin boards IMO, but enterprises prefer to use JAVA. I know most banks here in Canada, use JAVA for their secure websites.
S.D.A. wrote:
How on earth do you leap to such incredible conclusions ? I'm not referring to PHP or OSS. I'm referring to one bulletin board software application.
No comments:
Post a Comment